[pumseig]

What's your opinion on this beautiful "The Martin" tenor?
Looks like a relac to me, but I've been wrong many times before!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Martin-The...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

 

[Instrument Attic]

That's a pretty horn. I'd be surprised if it's been relacquered.

 

[buddy lee]

Looks original to me.

 

[Grumps]

Looks like a relac to me...

Why? I mean, at first glance it looks stunningly original. Nice pearls. Crisp engraving. Just not a lot of visible wear. And let's say if it wasn't original... if you were going to pass off a relacquered The Martin as original... you'd only get maybe a grand more for it. Not like the difference with a VI tenor. But looking again at the engraving... I suppose it could have been recut... but I still think that would be a long shot.

I would like to see the original case though; as you'd expect it would be in pretty good condition as well.

 

[notes_norton]

Anything that old has probably been lacquered. Until the very late 20th century, it was common to relaq a horn when it went in for an overhaul. You weren't given a choice, it was just part of the process.

Unless it was a closet queen, it's a relaq. If you are a collector it should matter, if you are a player IMHO it doesn't matter one bit.

Insights and incites by Notes

 

[JayeLID]

Anything that old has probably been (re)lacquered.

Actually, having refurbed over 1000 vintage saxes, I'd say the vast majority of horns from the 50's never have been relacquered.

I get what you are saying, that relacquering was a common thing and not looked upon negatively probably up until this millennium....but one cannot use the yardstick of a horn's age or vintage to generalize whether it was refinished or not.

In this instance, the hue IMHO is spot-on vintage Comm III, as Grumps notes the 'cut' of the engraving is nice and crisp, and the serial # doesn't seem to be pooled at all.

So it's either original, or a really, really artful, well-done relacq. Whether one or the other, who cares, really ? Either way we know it's a classic model and it is very beautiful.

 

[1saxman]

Man, the engraving looks great. Still, I think it is refinished. One thing is the engraving has no corrosion in it and Martin cut the engraving after lacquering, so it should be raw brass in every little cut. It eventually will look like this, which to me is a very attractive contrast to the existing lacquer:

The engraving has definitely been lacquered. Also the 'zipper' in the bell is visible under the lacquer which is a definite sign. The color of the lacquer doesn't look right but it did change to a lighter color in the '60s. This horn is an earlier one that goes back to the beginning of the CIII - this is a 1946 horn. I don't see any way it could be original, but it certainly was a careful/thoughtful re-finish if it was re-finished.
BTW, that one pictured was mine at one time and it is a 212xxx from 1962, and that is the lighter lacquer, believe it or not.

 

[LateNiteSax]

It is a relacq based on the originals I’ve had. Probably done 40+ years ago very thoughtfully and with care. The engraving beautiful but is not crisp ENOUGH.

Update. It’s a close call. Need better lighting to properly judge.

 

[claxton]

That is original. I am the second owner of a 153k horn in similar condition. I know for a fact that my horn has not been relacquered as I was good friends with the original owner who bought in Los Angeles in 1946 and rarely played it, since he was a career violin player. It looks so very much like this horn in all aspects. The line seen on the bell where the lacquer breaks (perhaps as a result of two dips?) is dead on. This looks to me to be really good deal on an original lacquer, fine horn.

 

[LateNiteSax]

I've come around to agree with you. The engraving of the later ones have a different look.

That is original. I am the second owner of a 153k horn in similar condition. I know for a fact that my horn has not been relacquered as I was good friends with the original owner who bought in Los Angeles in 1946 and rarely played it, since he was a career violin player. It looks so very much like this horn in all aspects. The line seen on the bell where the lacquer breaks (perhaps as a result of two dips?) is dead on. This looks to me to be really good deal on an original lacquer, fine horn.

 

[claxton]

Here are a few pictures of my horn, definitely original lacquer. Notice that the white plastic cap on the horn in question is not original as the came with a brass one as shown. The engraving can look sharp and bright or dark depending on lighting.

 

[saxcop]

I have two Martin tenors that are as nice or nicer than this one. It is original.

 

[Tranechaser]

Why? I mean, at first glance it looks stunningly original. Nice pearls. Crisp engraving. Just not a lot of visible wear. And let's say if it wasn't original... if you were going to pass off a relacquered The Martin as original... you'd only get maybe a grand more for it. Not like the difference with a VI tenor. But looking again at the engraving... I suppose it could have been recut... but I still think that would be a long shot.

I would like to see the original case though; as you'd expect it would be in pretty good condition as well.

The old foolproof test....original case = original lacquer!

 

[KennyZ]

If it is a relacquer, it is one of the best I ever seen

 

[Gulo gulo]

Since the keys are lacquered, seeing photo's of the keys in good light would be interesting. Those at least should have spots, no?
You could ask for more pictures from the seller and also pictures of the case. If it is a relacquer, it is very expensive.

 

[whaler]

Even with original the price is too high. I’d wait until he re-lists in the proper $1500 or so range or pass.

 

[StuartSax]

I vote relacquer but the photos are not revealing enough. The patent label under the SN would be the determining feature. It looks like it may be missing.

While not relevant to my opinion, the missing neck plug also suggests relac.

 

[Kritavi]

I vote relacquer but the photos are not revealing enough. The patent label under the SN would be the determining feature. It looks like it may be missing.

While not relevant to my opinion, the missing neck plug also suggests relac.

I agree with you. Also the way the light hits it the engraving looks quite shallow when in fact a Martin should be deep. I owned and sold maybe 20 of them. The photos are inconclusive but based on them I'd say excellent relac.

 

[Tranechaser]

I vote relacquer but the photos are not revealing enough. The patent label under the SN would be the determining feature. It looks like it may be missing.

While not relevant to my opinion, the missing neck plug also suggests relac.

Here's an original with the label on the back for reference.
http://saxoasis.com/tenor_saxophones_for_sale/the_martin_tenor

 

[Grumps]

You could ask for more pictures from the seller and also pictures of the case.

Some people misinterpret that clue. And that's all it really is; a clue. As you would expect a pristine horn with original finish to have an original case that's also in comparable shape. Of course it's not indicative on its own. But you have to be clever in regard to these issues, as often enough... they're never truly solved. But I'm glad you and others understand this rather obvious consideration, and of course its limitations.